Educational Gaming Commons

I'm very bummed I missed the annual Games, Learning, and Society Conference earlier this month. However, Chris Stubbs from the EGC attended, and he will be posting his thoughts here.

In the meantime, there's a great post on James Gee's Keynote Speech you might want to read. Gee talks about passion communities that spring up around games, a sort of social community outlet for the motivational forces that inspire people to play games. These communities give people status and power, IMO reinforcing the motivational aspects of games at a new level. Enjoy!

Ourworld is a neat mix of virtual worlds and gaming. You create an avatar, then earn "flow" or points to spend on clothing, rooms, etc. by playing games! I've only scratched the surface so far, but I love the concept. You can join for free, but can pay for a premimum membership. That gives you access to more games, features, etc.

I'd love to see a world like this for education, where you could have games on different subjects, earn certificates for subject areas, etc. By blending VW and gaming, you address the so-called weaknesses of both. So check it out and let us know what you think!

See http://associationofvirtualworlds.com/publishing_blue_book.php for a free copy!

For the past several weeks, the word on the street is that OpenSim and Second Life can "talk" to each other - meaning it's possible for an avatar to cross worlds. Neat stuff, and perhaps the precursos to the actual Metaverse we all hope for.

But where does this leave Linden Lab, creator of SL? Well, it appears that LL is looking to become a sort of virtual value-added reseller (VAR), providing services like economies, trading, etc. An interesting spin; will it work? This begs the bigger question - how will LL survive in the upcoming era of open source virtual worlds?

Read more at

http://www.virtualworldsnews.com/2008/07/lindeb-lab-plan.html

and

http://secondlife.reuters.com/stories/2008/07/11/interview-linden-prepar...

After months of anticipation, the time has finally come for the Stub to sally forth to Madison Wisconsin, for the GLS (Games, Learning, Society) Conference.  The conference lineup is a virtual who's who of the educational gaming community, and I'm tremendously excited for what I expect will be an overwhelmingly thought provoking few days.  Next year, I'm hoping we'll be speaking on behalf of the EGC, but this year, I'm just looking to take it all in and share some ideas with some great people. 

I'm not sure if I'll be blogging at the conference yet (it may take a few days to digest), but rest assured that Thursday and Friday I'll keep the Twitter stream filled with juicy nuggets of goodness. 

Stay tuned, and please forward all requests for cheese heads to my assistant. 

Orginally posted at chrisstubbs.com

Vicki Williams, a friend and colleague of mine at ETS, recently wrote an article titled Educational Gaming as an Instructional Strategy. It's now part of the Gaming section of this community. It was fun to talk to Vicki as she approached this article and see her excitement as she researched it. This is a common occurance, IMO. Once you start taking a serious look at educational gaming and see all the links to all the learning theories out there, the abstract becomes just a bit more real; deniability become plausibility.

Anyway, take a look and enjoy the article.

These sites came to me by way of PMOG and the PMOG player Jaden. Want to relive some old console games? Check out these links:

• http://www.nintendo8.com
• http://www.virtualnes.com
• http://www.playnes.net
• http://www.virtualapple.org
• http://c64s.com
• http://www.vgmuseum.com/end/snes

What a great resource! Thanks, Jaden!

Margaret Robinson, a games consultant, has a great post about the physical benefits of serious gaming. Games are being used for burn victims, people with post-traumatic stress, and more. I know at Penn State some research has been conducted using 3D virtual environments to speed the recovery of concussion victims. All this, IMO, is a form of learning via gaming.

It seems everywhere I turn, the evidence is mounting. Educational games aren't a fad or a waste. We have a long way to go before we can know exactly where they fit in the educational landscape, but they do have a seat at the table. Enjoy the article!

I've blogged before about Clark Aldrich and his blog.

His recent post titled Serious Games: The Vision, The Hype forced me to think about the diffusion of educational games in higher ed. Most faculty are mot aware of the radical changes games have seem in the past decade. Games = Pong.

So, if you want to encourage faculty to use games for education, one approch is baby steps. Clark writes about this in his post, suggesting a series of design revisions, moving from the tried and true towards gamelike structures.

The problem I see with this approach is our current setup for the design and delivery of content. In higher ed, we have a product mentality. I think as long as most folks have a "product" mentality, where you conceptualize, design develop, and implement X - then off to the next project! - the idea of multiple design rounds is a hard sell.

If we can convince ourselves and others to think of continuous prototyping as a valid way to produce a "product" that is never finished, only stable for this version, then we might be able to use multiple design rounds.

I know where I work this will take a long time to sell to administrators and faculty.

What are the alternatives? Besides the "dive in head first" option - another hard sell, you might be able to take a small portion of a course and build a game around just it. Dive in head first, but just for this tiny portion. Give the faculty time to adjust to the idea and see some success. Then go for the bigger, more immersive games.

This sounds like the continuous prototyping model above, but it does have some differences. First, the threat of a new teaching method is minimized. Second, you can identify and work with the low-hanging fruit in the course, moving the probability of success up. Third, you help the course instructor chunk their content, assisting them to see a path from where they are to a possible future that includes games as an integral part of their course.

I guess what I'm think here is still baby steps, but abstracted out one level. Go for the game tiny content piece by tiny piece, using rapid prototyping as a way to transform the course over time, not a portion of a course into a game.